PB4L School-Wide: What Will Support the Sustainability of the Initiative?

Elder, Katie I.; Prochnow, Jane E.

doi:10.1007/s40841-016-0036-1

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These questions are intended to lead to a more specific understanding of how to take action to promote sustainability.These stakeholders participate in a group dialogue: During this structured dialogue, the individual scores per pillar are compared (Chapman and Sammons, 2013), substantiated and discussed (Andreou et al. , 2015; Elder and Prochnow, 2016) by the stakeholders.Stakeholders decide on a joint score per pillar: These joint scores show the team's perceived progress towards sustainable development of the particular innovation. Possible improvement-directed actions are identified during the discussion of the differences in individual scores and what would be needed for a higher score.Stakeholders analyze the reflection sheet with potential improvement-directed actions: All suggestions for improvement are formulated and written down on a reflection sheet to obtain a structured overview of possible next steps in terms of improvement-directed actions.Stakeholders determine a concrete improvement goal and success criteria: On the basis of the analysis of the reflection sheet, improvement-directed actions are jointly chosen, including measurable, observable evaluation criteria and a timeframe.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promoting sustainable educational innovation using the Sustainability Meter

Tappel,

Poortman,

Schildkamp

et al. 2023

JPCC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSchools struggle with sustaining their educational innovations (Cohen and Mehta, 2017; Askell-Williams and Koh, 2020) and may benefit from concrete and practical guidance (Askell-Williams and Koh, 2020). A dialogue between staff within schools can be a way to promote self-evaluation regarding the innovation. Therefore, a self-evaluation tool for educators was developed: The Sustainability Meter (TSM). The purpose of the tool is to gain insight into the different perspectives and experiences of stakeholders within the school organization regarding the innovation, as a basis for improvement-directed actions to promote sustainable educational innovation.Design/methodology/approachIn this small-scale study, the authors explored conceptual and instrumental use of the Sustainability Meter in two phases, and also examined user satisfaction. In phase 1, the tool was used under the guidance of the researcher (first author), who supported the chairs in taking steps before the group dialogue took place, and who then guided the dialogue itself as a moderator. In phase 2, work with TSM was organized independently by the schools themselves, supported by the manual. Data were collected in the form of observations of the dialogue, group interviews and documents generated by the participants.FindingsIn terms of conceptual use, in general, participants gained better understanding of each other's perspectives and backgrounds with regard to the (sustainability of the) innovation. The dialogue also led to insights into challenges for growth toward sustainable innovation. For instrumental use, the results of the analysis were incorporated in a plan of action in the majority of the participants' schools. In terms of user satisfaction, participants in all groups perceived TSM as an enjoyable support for high-quality dialogue. This research provides some indications that the tool might lead to sustainable educational innovations.Originality/valueNext to developing an action plan based on the results of the school, the tool also appeared to help breaking up the process in smaller, clearer and more feasible improvement-directed actions. The results of this study further show that the authors could distinguish between three types of instrumental use. The improvement-directed actions in this research often were a combination of this three types: initial solutions, short-term and longer-term measures. This research provides some indications that the tool might lead to sustainable educational innovations.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2) These stakeholders participate in a group dialogue: During this structured dialogue, the individual scores per pillar are compared (Chapman and Sammons, 2013), substantiated and discussed (Andreou et al, 2015;Elder and Prochnow, 2016) by the stakeholders.…”

Section: The Sustainability Metermentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting sustainable educational innovation using the Sustainability Meter

Tappel,

Poortman,

Schildkamp

et al. 2023

JPCC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, most articles dealing with sustainability do not provide an explicit definition of the concept of 'sustainability' (Gaikhorst et al, 2018;Prenger et al, submitted). A number of dimensions have been mentioned in different articles however: sustained implementation of the core components of the intervention (e.g., Andreou et al, 2015aAndreou et al, , 2015bDrits-Esser et al, 2017;Gaikhorst et al, 2017;Kafyulilo et al, 2016); continuation of the intervention on the long run, or results that are maintained or continue to improve (e.g., Bean et al, 2015;Elder & Prochnow, 2016;Ferguson et al, 2011;Stringfield et al, 2008); becoming integral part of daily school routines (e.g., Bambara et al, 2012;Bean et al, 2015;Elder & Prochnow, 2016;Tam, 2009); scaling up of results (e.g., Dekker & Feijs, 2005); and adaptiveness (Benz et al, 2004;Deaney & Hennessy, 2007a, 2007bElias, 2010). These elements will be discussed in order to define sustainability for this study.…”

Section: Definition Of Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The high staff turnover in schools did not appear to negatively influence the embedding of data use for school improvement in organizational routines. Explanations can be found in sharing knowledge with new teachers (Andreou et al, 2015a(Andreou et al, , 2015bSaito et al, 2012), collegial formal and informal personal contacts (Dekker & Feijs, 2005) as well as communication among staff (Elder & Prochnow, 2016;Kirtman, 2002). School leaders play a role (van den Boom-Muilenburg, 2021), so explicit attention of school leaders in planning, organizing and providing a clear direction form the basis of involving new school personnel in ongoing implementation of interventions in schools (Homan, 2017).…”

Section: Implications For Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing aspects of sustainability

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many innovations that are implemented in schools are initially successful, but fail to become part of the schools’ habits and routines. Relatively little research has followed innovations in schools for a long(er) time. In addition, few reforms last long enough to be studied longitudinally. In this exploratory study, the authors aim to find a way to quantitatively measure the degree of sustainability of a data use intervention three to eight years after its initial implementation. Sustainability in this study was defined as ‘…the process of integrating and scaling the innovation’s core aspects in organizational routines that are adaptive to ongoing work, with continuing improvement of results’. A distinction was made between sustainability of the method and sustainability of the underlying goal of the data use intervention. A cluster analysis showed that schools can be categorized into four degrees of sustainability. A general view of the data indicated that the core components were present to varying degrees. Radar charts have been made and provided more insight. The process from organizational routines, and transfer of the intervention from the individual to the institutional level realizing organizational routines differs from school to school. The answer to the question as to whether an intervention has been sustained is not a simple yes or no. Sustainability is nuanced and can come in different forms. Measuring sustainability in a quantitative way contributes new perspectives and insights. With those insights further research can be done.

show abstract

“…Beyond a Champion, having a senior management team (SMT) that is committed to RP within schools was viewed by participants as essential for RP to thrive and progress. This has also been confirmed in a study of the processes of sustainable adoption of PB4L School-wide (see section 2.6 for more detail) (Elder & Prochnow, 2016).The sustainability of successful prolonged integration of RP into schools required senior management capability to lead the implementation and manage the change as dramatic shifts in practice were required. Senior management support for RP was perceived to be strong at each of the schools, however, to varying degrees.…”

Section: Senior Management Supportmentioning

confidence: 73%

Restorative Justice in New Zealand Schools: An Evaluation of Sustainable Practice

Jones¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past two decades, Restorative Practices have emerged internationally within schools as an alternative to the traditional punitive punishment model. Within New Zealand, schools have shown growing interest in Restorative Practices, with some adopting this with enthusiasm across their whole school practices, while others have shown a more cautious or short-term adoption. In spite of the growing interest, little is known about why some schools are successful adopters and others are not and what processes are occurring to promote well integrated and sustainable Restorative Practice in schools. This study investigated the sustainability of Restorative Practices across three New Zealand secondary schools, each of which had been successfully implementing Restorative Practice for a minimum of eight years. The goal of the study was to carefully trace the experiences of these schools, examining the processes that allowed Restorative Practice to become embedded in the school culture and what led to lasting integration. Schein’s model of organisational culture was used as an evaluative framework to explore the extent to which Restorative Practices were embedded within the schools. A comparative case study design was employed, gathering data from focus group sessions, semi-structured interviews, and observations. The data was analysed thematically to identify emergent themes. The findings indicated that the schools shared many similarities in their adoption and implementation of Restorative Practices. Factors that appeared to support the lasting integration of Restorative Practices were a contextual fit, including school readiness and the existing beliefs of the school and wider community, and leadership and support, including the commitment of Principals, the role of senior management, and the need for ongoing whole-staff professional development. Differences emerged across the three schools that also related to these factors. The study highlights the importance of the consistent and systemic embedding of Restorative Practices within school organisational culture if it is to be effectively implemented. It also underscores the need for better resourcing to equip schools to sustainably integrate practices that hold the potential to reduce the damage caused by punitive systems in schools.

show abstract

PB4L School-Wide: What Will Support the Sustainability of the Initiative?

Cited by 5 publications

References 11 publications

Promoting sustainable educational innovation using the Sustainability Meter

Promoting sustainable educational innovation using the Sustainability Meter

Distinguishing aspects of sustainability

Restorative Justice in New Zealand Schools: An Evaluation of Sustainable Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About